AMD Radeon RX 550X vs Intel Arc A380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and decisive picture in favor of the Intel Arc A380, though the magnitude of the victory varies significantly depending on the API. In the database’s head-to-head tests, the Intel card wins both recorded comparisons, but the margin is so large that it raises questions about the generational gulf between the two products.

Starting with Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc A380 scores 38,224, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X manages 9,662. That translates to a delta of -74.7% from the perspective of the AMD card, meaning the Intel part delivers roughly four times the compute throughput in this workload. The sheer scale of this difference suggests that the RX 550X, a 2018 entry-level part, is simply outclassed in raw compute tasks that scale well across shading units and memory bandwidth.

The Vulkan result is similarly one-sided. The Arc A380 posts 36,736, versus 11,299 for the RX 550X, a delta of -69.2% for the AMD card. While the percentage gap is slightly narrower than in OpenCL, it still represents a dominant performance lead for Intel. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that often rewards architectures with modern scheduling and higher clock speeds, and the data reflects that the Xe-HPG design is far better equipped for such workloads.

What is notable is that the RX 550X does not secure a single win in the head-to-head suite. The wins column shows 0 for AMD and 2 for Intel. This is not a close contest; it is a sweep. However, the context matters. The RX 550X was released in December 2018, while the Arc A380 arrived in June 2022, a gap of roughly three and a half years. The process node and architecture changes between those dates are substantial, and the benchmark results are consistent with that timeline.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores, the Intel card’s average sits at 8,558, which is lower than its individual Geekbench scores might suggest, because the database includes a wide range of tests, some of which are not favorable to it. The AMD card’s average is 10,481, which is higher than its head-to-head Geekbench scores alone would imply. This discrepancy highlights that the head-to-head tests are only a slice of the overall picture, and other workloads, such as older DirectX 9 or 2D tests, can shift the aggregate.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X has an average benchmark score of 10,481, while the Intel Arc A380 averages 8,558. Despite losing both head-to-head tests, the AMD card’s aggregate score is higher, likely because the Intel part’s scores in some legacy tests are very low.

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A380 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The Arc A380 scores 36,736 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to 11,299 for the RX 550X. The delta is -69.2% for the AMD card, meaning Intel’s part is more than three times faster in this specific test.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The RX 550X has 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth using 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The Arc A380 has 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth using 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. Intel’s card offers nearly double the bandwidth, despite a narrower bus, because of the higher memory clock speed.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A380 support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc A380 has 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 550X has no ray tracing cores listed, so it lacks dedicated hardware for that feature.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Intel Arc A380 has a transistor density of 45.9M per square millimeter, while the AMD RX 550X has 21.4M per square millimeter. This reflects Intel’s newer 6 nm process compared to AMD’s 14 nm node.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, and the data in the database makes that clear. The AMD Radeon RX 550X uses the Lexa chip on the GCN 4.0 architecture, a design that dates back to the Polaris generation. It is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors packed into a 103 mm² die. The Intel Arc A380, by contrast, uses the DG2-128 chip on the Xe-HPG architecture, from the Alchemist generation. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm node, with 7,200 million transistors in a 157 mm² die. The transistor count is over three times higher, and the density is roughly double, which explains a significant portion of the performance difference.

The compute resources also diverge sharply. The RX 550X has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Arc A380 doubles the shading units to 1,024, doubles the TMUs to 64, and doubles the ROPs to 32. This is a straightforward scaling of the classic GPU pipeline, but Intel also adds 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the AMD part. In terms of raw throughput, the RX 550X delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Arc A380 delivers 4.198 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 3.5 times. The FP16 performance is even more skewed: the RX 550X has 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Arc A380 has 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), showing that Intel’s design is far more efficient at half-precision workloads.

Memory architecture is another point of divergence. The RX 550X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) yielding 96.00 GB/s. The Arc A380 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), yielding 186.0 GB/s. Intel achieves higher bandwidth with a narrower bus, which reflects the faster memory technology. Interface support also differs: the RX 550X runs on PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Arc A380 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, doubling the available bandwidth to the host system.

API support is a further differentiator. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A380 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. DirectX 12 Ultimate includes features like ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the older AMD part cannot access. Display outputs also reflect the generational leap: the RX 550X offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc A380 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, enabling higher refresh rates and resolutions.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for users who prioritize raw compute performance: the Intel Arc A380 is the superior choice. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by overwhelming margins, offers more than three times the FP32 throughput, has double the memory bandwidth, and includes modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. For any workload that leverages these capabilities, such as compute-heavy tasks or modern games with advanced effects, the Arc A380 is clearly ahead.

However, the RX 550X is not without its merits, though they are narrower. Its average benchmark score of 10,481 is higher than the Arc A380’s 8,558, which suggests that in certain legacy workloads, such as older DirectX 9 or 2D tests, the AMD card holds up better. The RX 550X also has a much lower TDP at 50 W versus 75 W, and it requires no external power connectors, whereas the Arc A380 needs a single 8-pin connector. For users with very small power budgets or older power supplies without PCIe power cables, the RX 550X is the simpler drop-in solution.

The release dates are telling: the RX 550X launched in December 2018, and the Arc A380 in June 2022. The Intel card is a product of a newer era, and the benchmark results reflect that generational advantage. If the choice is between these two for a modern system, the Arc A380 is the better investment in terms of performance and feature set. If the system is old, has a constrained power supply, or runs software that does not scale beyond DirectX 11, the RX 550X may still serve adequately, but it cannot match the Intel part in any head-to-head test recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 550X | Intel Arc A380 |

|---------------|--------------------|----------------|

| Chip | Lexa | DG2-128 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Generation | Polaris (RX 500X) | Alchemist (Arc 3) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1183 MHz | 2050 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 96 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 186.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 32 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.93 GPixel/s | 65.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.86 GTexel/s | 131.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,211.4 GFLOPS | 4.198 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 75 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Length | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 222 mm (8.7 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 114 mm (4.5 inches) |

| Width | Not specified | 42 mm (1.7 inches) |

| Release Date | 2018-12-15 | 2022-06-13 |

| Predecessor | Polaris | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | Vega | Battlemage |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380 wins decisively in compute-heavy and modern workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,224 dwarfs the RX 550X’s 9,662, making it the clear choice for OpenCL-based applications, such as some scientific computing and video encoding tasks. The Vulkan score of 36,736 versus 11,299 reinforces this, suggesting strong performance in Vulkan games and compute APIs. The Arc A380 also leads in memory bandwidth (186.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), which benefits any workload that is bandwidth-limited, such as high-resolution texture streaming. Its 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support mean it is the only one of the two that can handle hardware-accelerated ray tracing and mesh shaders, making it suitable for modern AAA titles that use these features.

The AMD Radeon RX 550X, despite losing the head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score of 10,481 versus 8,558. This suggests it performs relatively better in certain legacy tests, such as PassMark DirectX 9 (where the Arc A380 scores only 73) or PassMark G2D (where the Arc A380 scores 610). The RX 550X also has a lower TDP of 50 W, no power connector requirement, and a shorter length of 145 mm, making it a better fit for small form factor systems with limited power delivery. Its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is more compatible with older motherboards, and its lack of a power connector simplifies installation. For users running older DirectX 9 or OpenGL applications, or for those building a low-power media or office PC, the RX 550X may be the more practical choice, even if it cannot match the Arc A380 in raw modern compute.